Rat Migration – And History Looks Different

The Loyal Black Rat

On February 1st, 2008, a report by an Australian researcher, traces the spread of the Indian rat. Indian rat migration, (this research shows) began 20,000 years – a corollary of human travel, and not natural migration. The route of this spread is through the Middle East – and later to Europe. This report focussed on the spread of the rat – and used modern DNA technology to track these migratory movements – with little or no historical comment.

The Black Rat (Rattus rattus) has had its role in history. But this new piece of research on the common rat adds to the re-write of history.

What …? Rat migration! Re-write history?

Aryan Invasion & Migration Theory

This report on rat migration adds to the re-look, currently underway, of (Indian and world) history.

Max Mueller’s theory, a German (orientalist, whatever they are) popularised a theory that originates the Indic civilisation from the Central Asia down to Iran – whether migration or invasion is possibly immaterial. Max Mueller’s theory is questionable due to his “open” agenda of Christian propaganda and the British colonial state patronage.

As per Max Mueller, from Iran, the Aryans branched out to Europe and India. Hence, the similarities in languages. There are alternative historical scenarios being mapped out. Politically, Max Mueller’s theory created a political divide in India that proposed Aryan conquest (by North India) of Dravidians(from South India). Unfortunately, our schools and history books still carry this suspect theory.

Recently, after racist attempts in the USA to push this theory, some NRI /PIO academics have carried out further research – which has made this theory look very flimsy.

In 1906-07, an Turkish archeologist , Theodore Makridi-Bey, started excavations at Hattusas (Boghazkoi), 150-200 kms from Ankara, in Cappadocia. He was joined by Hugo Winckler, a German archaeologist, specialising in Assyria. They unearthed more than 10,000 clay tablets which proved to be of tremendous interest. Till the decipherent of thes tabets, some 15 years later, it was assumed by Euro-centric historians that this must, “undoubtedly have been the temple of Jupiter, mentioned by Strabo.”

West Asian reluctance to give up slavery, made Indo Aryan rulers disengage politically from West Asia and Middle East. Judaism, Christianity and Islam, the three ‘desert religions’, gained the first converts from slaves, but continued with slavery till the 20th century. The 3 ‘desert religions’ instead of reforming slave societies, just transferred slave titles. Old slaves in turn became the new slave masters. Non-political Indian role in West Asia and Middle East continued to grow in terms of trade and learning. Babylon became a part of Alexander’s empire (and then the Roman Empire).

What Does This Mean

European historians have traditionally dated Aryan Indian civilisation at 1500-1800BC. The Indus valley was dated 1500-2000BC. At these dates, Hammurabi, ancient Babylon were already established. Greece was flourishing.

As for India – (following Max Mueller’s theory), it was a desolate, backward civilisation, awaiting Aryan conquest. Aryan conquerors came, raped Indian women, pushed Dravidians to the South, and ruled India. India’s progress was thus entirely due to the colonisers. This was history that was used by British colonisers and is accepted today.

DNA research shows that a band of Indians went into Europe – now referred to as Roma Gypsies and share Indian genetic code. These Roma Gypsies have been living at the edge of European society – and have been severely persecuted through history. While Nazi and Croat brutalities against the Jews is known, that against the Roma Gypsies is swept under the carpet. European derisory references to Indian untouchability, overlook their own treatment of co-inhabitants for at least 1000 years is matter of shame for Europe.

Speculatively speaking

When enterprising Indian traders set out from India and slowly spread across the Middle East to Turkey – spreading their languages, religion and social systems, travelling in caravans of bullock-carts. And ships of the fabled land of Ophir, from South India, known as Oviyarnadu, came to West Asia, carrying ivory, peacocks, monkeys, sandalwood (says the Bible).

These loyal rats travelled with the intrepid Indian traders, on their ships and bullock carts, is how I think these rats spread. This is yet another part of the jigsaw – in which the Amarna letters, the Boghazkoi tablets and the DNA sampling of Indians (and Indian rats) disprove the AMT /AIT theory. These incidents point to another version of history.

6 Responses

[…] Andy wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptThis same research also shows that Indians share certain DNA markers with West /Middle East Asia – which supports Indian presence in Egypt, Mesopotamia (Syria, Iraq) and Anatolia (Turkey). DNA research shows that a band of Indians went … […]

On Scientific Proof – the research is in such a transient state that deriving conclusions from it for ideological assertions will prove a mistake, you mentioned research denying any substantial proof regarding Aryan Migration Theory, but failed to mention quite an important research work by Michael Bamshad who published an influential paper – “Genetic Evidence on the Origins of Indian Caste Populations”. Genome Research . 11: 994-1004, 2001.

On the origins of Roma gypsies you are right i.e. they did originate from South Asia though your article seemingly puts this in an anachronistic light. The genetic evidence suggests their connection with the South Asian diaspora, it also suggests that the mother group which finally diverged georaphically was formed not more than 800-1000 years back (32-40 generations).

The first research supports Aryan Migration Theory and the following is irrelavant to AMT it being in a completely different historical period. Thus AMT stands.

India has about 40000 endogamous population groups. So, sampling is the most crucial thing. Some of these studies by Westerners have fixed their sample size to ‘reflect’ their own bias. Bamshad study is (from received opinion), suffers from sample size problems. After the sample, again what markers you isolate to differentiate and derive these conclusions can influence the outcome. In some cases there are clear ‘discrepancies’, when the same group is studies by Indians.
A further bolster to the new theory is DNA and mitochondrial mapping done by various teams. These mapping and analyses (Sanghamitra Sahoo, et al) show that there has been no major DNA (Analabha Basu, et al) inputs into India.
Some expert interpretation show that this data may require more and further research – as everything does all the time. More research done in India also throws up similar results regarding domestic DNA. This same research also shows that Indians share certain DNA markers with West /Middle East Asia – which supports Indian presence in Egypt, Mesopotamia (Syria, Iraq) and Anatolia (Turkey).
So, this research overall seems to be against the Aryan Invasion /Migration Theory. Apart from this, the really main markers in my mind are the social markers.
India is unique – with: –
1. No record of slave populations – that is capture, sale, purchase, trade, recapture with state and religious patronage.
2. Multi ethnic, religious and language systems – which is again unique.
3. Is the social structure which highly stable and less prone to criminal behaviour.
It is these markers which determine, Indic cultures from all others.
If our culture, language, religion and values indeed came in from outside, why have the original populations not been able to sustain this for the 4000-5000 years that India has done.

Of course, regarding the Roma Gypsy migration to Europe, it was never implied or meant to show that it more than 1000 years old – which seems to be the currently accepted date of Gypsy migration to Europe. However, I will re-read my post and suitably, modify, if required, such an ‘anachronism’.

2. Between 1015 individuals and 1490 individuals is a 47% difference. Does such a large difference, are you implying makes no difference?

3. You are also missing the element of which markers you choose to use for differentiation …

4. Most importantly, you must also see the sample composition … of the Bamshad study composition.

5. In both my post – and my reply, I have qualified with “expert interpretation show that this data may require more and further research – as everything does all the time.”

If you look at the preponderance of data … both DNA and non-DNA, you will see where the ‘balance of convenience’ lies.

The Aryan Invasion Theory is a very tribal theory – whereas the Indian concept of ‘aryadhwaja’ is a socio-cultural flag. Just on this one simple concept, I would describe the Western Theory of AMT /AIT as an after thought.

Get a 2ndlook on

Email Subscription

2ndlook Blogs

Quicktake focusses more on current events, recent events, reports, media buzz, matters of topical interests. Typically, Quicktakes are shorter than 2ndlook. Sometimes a few Quicktakes, morph into a 2ndlook post.